1955--Marty, Delbert Mann

 

1955--Marty, Delbert Mann
Nominated: Love is a Many-Splendored Thing, Mr. Roberts, Picnic, The Rose Tattoo
Should Have Won: Night of the Hunter
Be Sure to See: The Blackboard Jungle, Lady and the Tramp, Rebel Without a Cause, To Catch a Thief, The Trouble With Harry
"Two women in the same kitchen make a house-a burn up,"--Aunt Catherine (in an Italian accent)

     In the few roles I've seen Ernest Borgnine play, he always struck me as a tough guy I wouldn't want to tangle with. In Marty I saw a softer side. Marty Poletti lives with his old Italian mother and works as a butcher. He is in his mid-thirties and isn’t married though all of his siblings are. If he ever forgot he was single he sure gets reminded of it often. I saw where the story was going pretty early on and, though I connected with Marty, I didn't really feel emotional about his single-life plight until about fifteen minutes in. He calls a woman for a date and is rejected. This is when my attitude for both Marty and Marty came into focus. I wanted so badly for him to find happiness.

     I've read some takes on the movie's plot and they almost always say it is about Marty finding love but I don't think so. I think it is about him finding acceptance. At a dance, someone offers Marty $5 to take a girl home so he can hook up with an old friend he sees there. In this scene, we see how big Marty's heart is because anyone else would jump at the chance for a free five dollars and to get to talk to a girl. But Marty immediately took to the girl's feelings and declines. What follows is the storyline of Marty meeting the girl anyway and it kicks off with him gazing at her from across the room in the first of two great shots in the movie. 

    The girl is Clara and Marty eventually walks her home. What spawns from this is a somewhat awkward relationship (if you can call it a relationship since the movie takes place over only a couple days). They are both shy and unsure of themselves. They know they like each other but they also know mutual attraction is a new feeling for both of them. Marty realizes he is heavyset and out of touch with a woman's desires and people (including Marty's mother) let him know that Clara is not a beauty queen, even calling her a dog. This was puzzling to me because I found her quite attractive. Lots of times someone's attitude makes them more attractive, it's true, but these people were referring to her looks. She looked okay to me. 

    Their first night together goes fairly well though Marty babbles on the whole evening while Clara listens politely. But Marty's intentions are to be a gentleman and even goes the extra step to walk on the outside of the sidewalk, which is a lost art I still practice. The night is capped off interestingly with Clara meeting Marty's mother in an uncomfortable exchange. It is clear his mother doesn't approve which surprised me. I figured she'd be happy with anyone he brings home, particularly since Clara is Catholic like they are. But Marty isn't deterred by it, as he isn’t deterred by his friends disapproval of her. And after walking her home my other favorite shot occurs when Marty's burst of excitement and joy makes him run into the street yelling for a taxi. 

 

     The end is a little abrupt yet appropriate. I won't spoil it but my first thought was there should have been another scene with a second meeting with the couple, but that is when I figured out what the theme was (at least in my mind). I think it is acceptance. Marty's mother and friends don't accept Clara but Marty does. Is it because he loves her? Is it because they had such a good time on the date? Is it because he is tired of being alone and she is the only chance he has? Maybe in a longer movie or a sequel we would find out. But under the circumstances, all we know is they enjoyed each other and found happiness, despite what others think. The ending made me feel good and Marty and Clara's happiness brought me happiness, and that is good enough for the three of us. 

      Note: Just something I thought of. The movie is called Marty and was made in 1955. As a Back to the Future fan, I couldn't help but notice that Marty McFly travels back to 1955. I guess that was the year of Marty. 

 

1954--On the Waterfront, Elia Kazan



1954--On the Waterfront—Elia Kazan

Nominated: The Caine Mutiny, The Country Girl, Seven Brides for Seven Brothers, Three Coins in a Fountain

Should have won: On the Waterfront

Be sure to see: Creature from the Black Lagoon, Dial M for Murder, Godzilla: King of the Monsters, Rear Window, Seven Samurai
“(My coat is) more full of holes than the Pittsburgh infield.”--Timothy Dugan

 

     Former boxer Terry Malloy takes a job on the waterfront for the same mob union boss who had him take a fall when he used to fight. The mob kills a man and Terry falls in love with Edie, the deceased man's sister. Since Terry and his coworkers are working for the mob, he begins to feels tormented by it.

 

     On the Waterfront is a lot more complex than that synopsis let me be. But I figured I'd just end it there. Many people consider Marlon Brando's performance to be the greatest acting performance of all time. Funny because I think his was the third best in this movie. I enjoyed Karl Malden as Father Barry more and the best thing about it is Lee J. Cobb as the corrupt Johnny Friendly. I've seen Cobb in only four movies and all four are four star films; this, The Exorcist, How the West was Won and 12 Angry Men. In my review of All the King's Men I mentioned the lead reminded me of a cross between Cobb and Rodney Dangerfield, if you need a reminder of what I'm going for. For what it is worth, I say the best acting job is Ben Kingsley as Gandhi.

 

     Much of this movie is about trying to find out the right thing to do. When Terry testifies against Friendly, he gets disrespected and called a pigeon. Terry keeps birds on the roof of his apartment in a coop and a neighborhood kid kills them. “A pigeon for a pigeon!” the kid yells. Upon returning to work, all them men are said they can begin working except Terry.

 

     The fight climax and what the other workers do afterward in rebellion of Friendly is a great moment but most people's favorite is the scene in the cab with Terry and his brother. It could be called the famous “I coulda been a contender” scene. This is the scene Terry really opens up and we can see what he is all about, not just what his persona emits. The dialogue in that scene is poetic and I've read it mostly followed the script. The only thing that wasn't scripted was when Terry said “Charlie” fourteen times. Another improvised scene of note is the glove scene. As Terry and Edie are taking a walk, Eva Marie Saint (meaning the actress as opposed to the character) accidentally drops her glove. Brando picks it up and instead of handing it back, starts to play with it and put it on. Not that big a deal, but one of those curious things that are unscripted that find themselves in the final print of movies, like the “How do I look” “You look great” scene in Kramer vs Kramer which was just the actress asking the actor how she looked before the scene started rolling, unknowing the scene was rolling. That won best picture of 1979 so look for it later on.

 

     On the Waterfront is one of the better best picture winners but it is a curious one. I like it a lot but I've only seen it twice and have no desire to see it again any time soon. Typically, if I enjoy a movie, I want to revisit it. This isn't the case with this one. Sure, I thought it was great but it isn't one I'd desire to pop in every week. To tie in Brando with that I'd say it isn't really my "streetcar" to watch it again any time soon.



1953--From Here to Eterninty, Fred Zinnemann

 

1953--From Here to Eternity, Fred Zinnemann
Nominated: Julius Caesar, The Robe, Roman Holiday, Shane
Should Have Won: Shane
Be Sure to See: War of the Worlds
"He'd strangle in his own spit if he didn't have me around to swab out his throat for him."--Sgt. Warden

     A decent but unfocused movie, From Here to Eternity has several plots it seems to be “about”. Montgomery Clift from Red River, one of my favorite westerns, plays Pvt. Robert E. Lee Prewitt from Kentucky. He is a stubborn soldier in a new unit and makes few friends and many enemies when he refuses to join the company boxing team because of a tragic fight from his past. His friend Maggio is picked on by sadistic Fatso (the always perfect Ernest Borgnine). And First Sergeant Warden has an affair with the captain's wife. These are the movie's plot points yet it seems to be the Oscar winner that was about the Pearl Harbor bombing, though that doesn't happen until 1:45 in. It doesn't know if it wants to be a military movie, a love affair movie, or a movie about an outsider trying to fit in. But it is still pretty good, just a little unfocused.

     The direction is pretty good but there are two shots that seem to be added in and I could just feel the director sitting behind the camera grinning. One is when Warden is on the phone with Karen (Captain Holmes' wife) and the calender beside him is turned to December 6, 1941. The following scene we see a street sign pointing the direction to Pearl Harbor. I expected the camera to pan over to show director Fred Zinnemann saying, “Eh? See what I did there?”

     Some of the scenes seem a little rushed or obscure for me. Like the fate of Maggio played by Frank Sinatra in an Oscar nominated role. All I could think of when he was on screen was he looked skinnier than Barney Fife. It might or might not be a spoiler here to mention he dies but the way he died is very confusing. I know who is responsible but not how it happened. Knife fight perhaps though my first thought was he beat him to death. Of course he gives one of those death speeches before he croaks. This sets up the revenge knife fight between Prewitt and Fatso in the alley. There was an earlier fight between Prewitt and Gallovich who had taunted Prewitt to box the whole time. This was filmed with a typical style of the times. Lots of pick up shots and clumsy footwork. The ally fight worked a little better. I think it was well blocked out but a little short. However I liked how the death stab was off camera, leaving the audience wondering who wins (oh wait, I remember what Patrick Swayze said in Road House: Nobody ever wins in a knife fight). 

     The movie is iconic because of the beach scene. Burt Lancaster (I still always picture him as Moonlight Graham no matter what I see him in) and Deborah Kerr on the beach with the water flowing over them. My two issues with this scene are 1) it was too brief. The fact they were there together is important; the water passes over them and they get up and run, rather than stay there. The scene passes faster than the tide did, and 2) I can't see it and not think of Airplane!

    It was an okay movie but did very well with audiences and the Academy. It was nominated for thirteen Oscars winning eight, the most since Gone with the Wind. My problem with it was of its uncertainty of what the main plot was. I've seen it three or four times and it is certainly worth a look, but the Academy voters should have come back to the voting ballots and given it to Shane...get it?

 

 

1952--The Greatest Show on Earth, Cecil B. DeMille

 

1952--The Greatest Show on Earth, Cecil B. Demille
Nominated: High Noon, Ivanhoe, Moulon Rouge, The Quiet Man
Should Have Won: Singin' in the Rain
Be Sure to See: Monkey Business, Rabbit Seasoning
"The girl may say no but the woman in her says yes,"--Sebastian

    Before directing Charlton Heston in the epic Ten Commandments, Cecil B. DeMille guided him in The Greatest Show on Earth, 1952's second best movie about show business. The best, of course, is one of the greatest movies ever made...see the above section but it is pretty obvious.  Early on in this film, Heston is holding a baby gorilla. He worked much better with apes sixteen years later. However, I've seen thirteen of his movies (well two of them he had cameos) and I would say I've liked twelve of them at least a little bit (Almost an Angel being the only exception and The Naked Jungle was boring for the most part but came along at the end). The Greatest Show on Earth was an odd viewing for me because even though it had a lot of action, it was a bit boring. Seems like a contradiction I suppose. But for what it is worth I felt the same way about Jaws. 

     Heston (looking like an early model for Indiana Jones) plays Brad Braden, a traveling circus manager. The circus has lots of acts, like any circus, but the movie only cares about one: the acrobatic act. Two trapeze artists, one male one female, are competing for center ring. Holly is good but Sebastian is much better and more experienced. Sure there are some scenes with the elephants, one almost stepping on a woman's head, and the curiously out of place subplot of Buttons the Clown played by the normally top billed Jimmy Stewart. He never takes his makeup off...ever. He is wanted for a past crime that I think was murder but I'm not sure. But the main story is that of the acrobats, even over Braden’s story even though he is the main character. 

     The movie seems to follow All About Eve's formula from two years earlier about an up and comer trying to overtake the more established performer. But in this case, Holly and Sebastian seem to actually care for each other. The trapeze stunts are done quite well. It seems like the actors are actually the ones performing them in lieu of stunt doubles. True, some of the action high above the floor is neat, but the best act in the circus was the lady juggling off the floor. A scene that lasts fourteen seconds. I'd like to see more of her. 

    Some subplots are thrown in. The cops are onto Buttons and his crime and Sebastian has a nasty accident which leaves him injured in a way that doesn't seem like the injury fits the fall. There is a very impressively done train crash but I was confused by how quickly everyone moved on from it. Gives “The show must go on” a whole new meaning. Because Buttons was on the train, this sequence made me think of The Fugitive with a train crashing and one of the passengers is wanted. Buttons is involved in a sad scene helping someone with an injury. It was meant to come across sincere but since he is in his clown getup it is hard to take seriously.

     The Greatest Show on Earth is not the greatest movie you'll ever see. I'm not sure what the Academy was thinking crowning it over High Noon and am certainly baffled on omitting Singin' in the Rain, one of the greatest movies ever made, from contention altogether. I wouldn't suggest skipping this movie but if you put a list of the winners together in order of "must see," you would want to put this toward the bottom. 

   

    Though my favorite lines are the one above and when the narrator compares the 58,000 pound tent to a dismembered giant's skin, the most curious is one a woman says about Sebastian. Maybe I'm reading too much into it but she is washing another performer's hair when Sebastian walks by. The woman having her hair washed says “Why is it whenever he's around I'm all wet?” and the other woman says, “In more ways than one.” Naughty, naughty. 

 

 

1951--An American in Paris, Vincente Minnelli











1951--An American in Paris—Vincente Minnelli

Nominated: Decision Before Dawn, A Place in the Sun, Quo Vadis, A Streetcar Named Desire

Should have won: Strangers on a Train,

Be sure to see: The African Queen, Alice in Wonderland, The Day the Earth Stood Still

“Back home, everyone said I didn't have any talent. They might be saying the same thing over here but it sounds better in French”--Jerry Mulligan

 

     This could possibly be one of the worst decisions for best picture winners of all time. Not because it is bad but because of the year's competition (and snubs for that matter) were so good. Also, hindsight of the fact that the following year Gene Kelly, without a doubt my favorite dancer in movie history, would star in and co-direct the greatest musical and one of the top five greatest movies ever made with Singin' in the Rain. This film has a lot of charm but ultimately misses the mark.

 

     Kelly plays Jerry Mulligan, a World War II veteran in Paris trying to earn a living as a painter. As in Singin' in the Rain, Kelly's character is friends with a piano player, has a woman interested in him romantically, and he is interested in another woman. Another tangled love story where we hope the right two end up together. As with most musicals, the story is really the sideline. The musical numbers are decent but few and far between. Dance numbers in a musical are like pun scenes in a Marx Brothers movie. They are the target of the viewer and the remaining scenes are filler and we can't wait to get to the next pun, or dance in this movie's case. In order for a musical to not be wall to wall with music and still pull it off is, obviously, to have a solid plot line tying the scenes together. The plot in Singin' in the Rain and The Blues Brothers, for example, achieve this brilliantly. Yes, all of the musical scenes in those movies are fantastic but when characters are just being characters, the audience's interest is still in tact. I didn't feel that way in An American in Paris.

 

    The “I got rhythm” number with all the children is the highlight of the film. When Jerry yells "Airplane!" and spins around is an impressive maneuver and the best part of the scene is all of the children and their reactions. But also take note of Leslie Caron's solo number where she wears different costumes. I liked her in this movie and found her to be quite beautiful. She sort of has a young Shirley Maclaine vibe going on who, incidentally, will show up two winners from now in 1960. Caron will make another appearance in 1958's winner, Gigi, though that is not among my favorite winners, either. An American in Paris is worth taking a look at, and a decent musical, but it could have benefited with three or four more dance numbers and is certainly on the lower end of the best picture rankings. The reason it slips so low for me is really quite simple: It needed more dance scenes.

 



1950--All About Eve, Joseph Mankiewicz





 



1950--All About Eve, Joseph Mankiewicz

Nominated: Born Yesterday, Father of the Bride, King Solomon's Mines, Sunset Blvd

Should Have Won: All About Eve
Be Sure to See: Cinderella, Rabbit of Seville
"Nice speech, Eve. But I wouldn't worry too much about your heart. You can always put that award where your heart ought to be."--Margo Channing

     To come up with my vote for the best line in a particular movie, I'll jot them down as they are said while I'm watching it. All About Eve is bursting with stellar lines. I learned in a film class that dialogue is the most tricky part of the screenplay to write and was taught sometimes to leave it out and write it last. I guess Joseph Mankiewicz is one of those people who have an ear for it. All About Eve's most famous line “Fasten your seat belts, it's going to be a bumpy night” is probably about the tenth best line in the movie, as far as I am concerned.

 

     The story is about an adoring fan who becomes a friend, then an understudy, then takes over for the star she had once adored. It is based on an actual occurrence in the 1940s, written about by Mary Orr in a story called “The Wisdom of Eve.” A girl named Martina Laurence used to hang around outside the theater trying to get to know actress Elizabeth Bergner. At one point, Laurence stepped in for an audition when Bergner was late and eventually got one of Bergner's fan letters. This same situation happens in this movie. A related story of interest is how actress Telugu Bankhead, known from an early Hitchcock movie Lifeboat, thought Bette Davis was stealing her image in the roles she plays. She has even been quoted as saying “Bette Davis? Yeah, she does my roles in the movies.” I bring this up because in All About Eve, Davis is on the receiving end of what she was accused of doing to Bankhead.

 

     Fascinating as the back story for the movie is, the movie itself is stellar as well. It even coined a term in the industry. To be known as an Eve Harrington is to be a backstabbing understudy. Margo Channing is the finest actress working and Eve seems to know it. After a performance, she asks Margo's friend, Karen, if she could meet Eve. She does and is star struck, tells all about her past and immediately becomes Margo's aide. At first Margo is flattered to have someone who adores her so much, but then Eve doesn't seem so innocent. She studies Margo, sends Margo's husband a telegram about a birthday party pretending to be Margo. Then becomes her understudy.

 

     One of the best characters in the movie was Karen who, while many of the characters seem merely annoyed at Eve's doings, seems generally angry. Some of her icy stares are all we need to see to know her feelings toward Eve. But all the while Eve acts innocent, she even says it would kill her to think she had upset Mrs. Channing. There is a big revelation about Eve toward the end and after she wins an award, Margo delivers a line so good I actually yelled “Oh!” alone to the television. I suppose Eve is a villain but she is so friendly she doesn't fall into the typical movie villain type. She certainly isn't evil but her good intentions are so flawed they become villainous.

 

     I imagine this movie is very popular with people in the acting business. But I think everyone can relate to it if you think of someone mooching in on your job after seeming to admire your work. This movie is a gem but the dialogue is the key. For fans of Marilyn Monroe, look for her in a brief role. I also found the ending very chilling for a drama. The final scene made me feel a little uneasy which is exactly what it should do. The problem is that final shot is a positive and a negative. I won't reveal why it is positive because it will spoil what caused this emotion for me but the negative is  camera operator is reflected in a mirror.  Every movie has continuity flaws here and there, they are unavoidable. But when crew members are on camera it is a different story, and along with the one in the ending there is another scene where a man with a mustache is holding the camera in the ladies' room. I'm not sure how those shots got by the editors. But who cares? All About Eve is one of the best Oscar winners of all time.



 

1949--All the King's Men, Robert Rossen

1949--All the King's Men, Robert Rossen
Nominated: Battleground, The Heiress, A Letter to Three Wives, Twelve O' Clock High
Should Have Won: Adam's Rib
Be Sure to See: Long Haired Hare, The Third Man, White Heat
"I'm gonna run. You're not gonna stop me. I'm gonna run even if I don't get a single vote."--Willie Stark

     All the King's Men is an odd film. It is odd because, even though it isn't bad, it is very forgettable. I watched it. I liked it okay. I returned it. Then a few hours later I figured I should pop it in so I can watch it for this review. Then it donned on me I had already seen it. It is forgettable yet somewhat enjoyable, mainly because of Roderick Crawford in the lead as a corrupt politician. Mercedes McCambridge was also a standout in an Oscar winning role but whenever she spoke I couldn't help but remember she was the voice of the possessed Reagan who Linda Blair embodied in The Exorcist. It was unavoidable. 

    Stark is certainly a villain in the movie but I kind of liked his personality. He came across as a mix of Lee J. Cobb and a hardcore serious Rodney Dangerfield, at least that is what he sounded like. He has a few powerful moments, in particular the speech he gives about how he used to be a hick. Some turbulence arises when his son, who is a football player (a running back who wears 73. You football fans will see the problem there) is involved in a bad car wreck and he is corrupt in his use of blackmail. The situation gets tricky because the person he blackmails is someone who used to blackmail people thirty years before...I think. 

 

     If you are into politics, I would recommend this movie to you. I am not really a political person so I liked it for the performances, especially Crawford and McCambridge. But you know back in high school when you had to read a book and a few pages into a chapter you forgot what you read? That is how this movie is to me.

1948--Hamlet, Laurence Olivier

1948--Hamlet, Lawrence Olivier
Nominated: Johnny Belinda, The Red Shoes, The Snake Pit, The Treasure of Sierra Madre,
Should Have Won: Red River
Be Sure to See: Abbot and Costello Meet Frankenstein, Buccaneer Bunny, Bugs Bunny Rides Again, Key Largo, Rope
"Justly killed with my own treachery,"--Laertes

    If you read Hamlet in high school you will remember in fifteenth century Denmark, Prince Hamlet schemes to avenge his father's death when his uncle murders him and weds the queen. If not, Laurence Olivier reminds you in this film. Olivier, reputed to be one of the finest stage actors of all time, directed and starred in the role. Olivier is certainly the high point in this rather dull movie. I learned in the documentary for Marathon Man (which Olivier was nominated for best supporting actor) that he had to be reminded to be more quiet. When he spoke his lines he would want to belt them louder. This comes from his days on the stage when an actor had to get the people in the balcony to hear him as opposed to a boom mic hanging just out of frame in a movie. 

  

     Other than Olivier's performance, I didn't care for the film. It had some interesting moments like when Hamlet's father's spirit visits in a pretty creepy image, when the gravedigger finds a skull, and the sword/dagger competition. I did enjoy how that scene turned out; who wins and how things were pretty calm until the eventual winner gets cut and goes bonkers. But at one point, I realized the famous soliloquies that begins "To be or not to be..." brushed past me and I had to rewind to take note. 

     The story is great, Olivier is fantastic, and I bet it would be amazing to see on stage. But this movie just felt wrong. It didn't feel like a film at all. It felt like someone put on a stage play and a couple of people were in the audience filming it, then edited their footage together to get a cohesive flow and different angles. I admit this is probably the least complex review I've done. The movie is simply forgettable. Sure the performances were great, but are they great enough to watch on the screen and to win the Oscar? Now that is the question.